Intel Z87 Motherboard Review with Haswell: Gigabyte, MSI, ASRock and ASUS
by Ian Cutress on June 27, 2013 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- MSI
- Gigabyte
- ASRock
- Asus
- Haswell
- Z87
- Shark Bay
- Lynx Point
MSI Z87-GD65 Gaming In The Box
When a product range is diverted away from the main SKU stack with specific branding, it opens up the possibilities when it comes to in-the-box contents. An overclocking range needs extra features related to overclocking, and thus a gaming range needs extra features related to gaming. In the Z77 package this was not particularly the case, and with the Z87 package we get:
Driver Disk
Quick Start Guide
Manual
Rear IO Shield
MSI Gaming Door Sign
Stick-on MSI Gaming Shield
Four SATA cables
Flexi-SLI bridge
VCheck Extension cables
The door sign and gaming shield are arguably extras related to gaming, allowing the user to express a pro-MSI attitude, although there does not feel as if there is anything significant extra beyond the usual SATA cables and SLI bridge.
MSI Z87-GD65 Gaming Overclocking
Experience with MSI Z87-GD65 Gaming
Previous experiences overclocking on MSI motherboards have been fairly dichotomous. On the one hand, most of the time, they perform rather well, but it can be a struggle (mostly due to the lack of menu option ordering) to get there. In other situations, overclock performance can be over in left field, the wrong side of the foul line, as we saw with the Z77A-GD65 Gaming compared to later tests.
Thankfully however the Z87-GD65 Gaming has stepped up to the plate in terms of performance, but still has a small issue of menu option ordering. To start, the automatic overclock options are very simple – you have OC Genie on or off, and you can select between two levels (high/low, or gaming/extreme if you prefer). This to a certain extent does not help when dealing with manual overclocking as there is nothing to guide the manual settings, but based on our previous experience we were able to push our good CPU to a decent CPU speed. One other note worth mentioning is that the LLC performance of the Z87-GD65 is spot on – a case of what you set is what you get / is reported, and confirmed by a fellow UK overclocker.
The only issue with the beta BIOS we tested was that we could not reduce the VRIN voltage – the lowest option was 1.80 volts or Auto. This should be fixed in a later BIOS update.
Methodology:
Our standard overclocking methodology is as follows. We select the automatic overclock options and test for stability with PovRay and OCCT to simulate high-end workloads. These stability tests aim to catch any immediate causes for memory or CPU errors.
For manual overclocks, based on the information gathered from previous testing, starts off at a nominal voltage and CPU multiplier, and the multiplier is increased until the stability tests are failed. The CPU voltage is increased gradually until the stability tests are passed, and the process repeated until the motherboard reduces the multiplier automatically (due to safety protocol) or the CPU temperature reaches a stupidly high level (100ºC+). Our test bed is not in a case, which should push overclocks higher with fresher (cooler) air.
Automatic Overclock:
OC Genie can be applied either physically on the board or in the BIOS with a click. Both give the same overclock settings, and both are affected by the OC Genie DIP switch on board, which gives the option of two levels of overclock. Here are our results:
At OC Genie Level 1, the CPU was set to 40x100 at 1.100 volts in Static mode, leaving LLC on Auto and boosting CPU Power/Current limits to 255 W and 256 A respectively. At this setting, the system reported a load voltage of 1.099 volts, passed PovRay with a score of 1661.79, and passed OCCT with a peak temperature of 67C. The setting also applied XMP.
At OC Genie Level 2, the CPU was set to 42x100 at 1.200 volts in Adaptive mode, leaving LLC on Auto and boosting CPU Power/Current limits to 255W and 256A respectively. At this setting, the system reported a load voltage of 1.201 volts, passed PovRay with a score of 1730.08, and passed OCCT with a peak temperature of 74C. The setting also applied XMP.
Overall I would prefer a few more automatic overclock options. Many manufacturers have noticed that by offering several options from 4.0 GHz to 4.5 GHz that this allows users to see the slow climb in settings required for higher manual overclocks.
Manual Overclock:
The manual overclock options can either be performed in the OS under Control Center or Intel XTU, but I typically perform my overclocks in the BIOS so we head there. MSI’s overclock options are unfortunately far from being structured – every option is just put in a list with a sense of vague order but not really helping the user too much. Thankfully they have added in a help box to tell users what setting does what – all this needs now is suggested values.
For our manual testing we start at 4.0 GHz (40x100) and 1.000 volts. On a successful stability test, we raise the multiplier, and on a failure we raise the voltage by 0.025 volts. For the MSI board, we left LLC and CPU VRIN on automatic. Our results are:
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
ShieTar - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link
Is there a special reason not to test the POST times and DPC latency of the Gigabyte Board? Its power consumption is quiet impressive, and whatever design measures have been used to achieve it do not seem to negatively affect the overall performance. So it would be interesting to complete the picture with the two measurements which are missing.IanCutress - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link
DPC Latency on the Gigabyte during testing was jumping around a fair bit, hitting 800+, though that is more likely due to the early BIOS revision. I need to run the POST test (as the results are strangely missing from my database) as well as the DPC test on a newer BIOS. Since I started testing almost every manufacturer has released newer BIOSes (as is always the way coming up to a launch) and I really have to lay the hammer down as testing a whole new BIOS takes a good 30 hours or so start to finish, so when I'm locked in that's it. That in a way does give an unfair advantage to the board I test last, but there's not a lot else I can do. I am still getting emails of BIOS updates for these boards as of yesterday.Ian
tribbles - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link
Am I wrong in thinking that Gigabyte hasn't been doing well in the DPC Latency Test since Z77? If so, that's kind of surprising, since Gigabyte seems to be a "go-to" brand for digital audio workstation builders.IanCutress - Wednesday, July 10, 2013 - link
I retested the UD3H on the F5 (public) BIOS, and it scored 164. The two next boards I have in for review got 160 and 157, which points fingers to the DPC on Haswell being 150+ regardless of motherboard. This might be a fundamental issue.Timur Born - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
Run Prime95 (or turn off CPU power features) while measuring DPC latencies to see how much CPU power saving features affect DPCs.jhonabundance - Thursday, August 28, 2014 - link
great share http://asus.comjhonabundance - Thursday, August 28, 2014 - link
this is the best share http://asus.comRick83 - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link
Maybe a bad choice to use two different ways of graphing the Rightmark results.Being consistent with regard to cutting off the irrelevant bit of the graph makes it a much easier read.
Now it appears at first glance as though the Gigabyte board is much better in THD+N, simply because the differences were so minuscule in the dynamic range bit.
On another note: Shouldn't it be more interesting to use a standardized input instead of the input of the board? In the current protocol a good output could be handicapped by a bad input, and conversely. For most users the output is much more important than the input, so it might be better to test it independently? I would recommend using a USB soundcard as an easy means of doing this test on the same machine, without changing the setup protocol too much.
And finally - I seem to remember Rightmark results for earlier reviews - it would be interesting to have those (or maybe a reference soundcard?) as comparison in the same graph. After all, for DPC you maintain a large cross-platform table as well.
Nice thorough initial review, those nitpicks withstanding.
IanCutress - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link
Unfortunately I can't adjust the engine to represent from 0 for negative values, I don't have access to the low level options. I forwarded it on as an issue.I'd love to use a standardized input with RMAA. I guess it would be good to get a sound card with an input that supercedes the output of the motherboard and put it through that way, and hopefully there won't be a driver conflict along the line. I'll see what I can do to get in the hardware for that, although many soundcards are designed more for output and the input dynamic range/distortion might be the limiting factor as is the case on motherboards. Something like the Xonar Essence STX has a 118 dBA input with -113 dBA THD+N which might be a good starting point.
Our RMAA testing for Z87 has changed a little from Z77 to make it more of an efficiency test rather than an out-the-box test as audio is such a varied playing field. RMAA is very sensitive to certain windows settings and volumes for example such that with the right combination it was very easy to show A>B or B>A depending on how the OS felt it should be set up. The new testing regimen for RMAA should iron out those issues but the results are not exactly comparable to Z77 for that reason. There are so many wrong ways to set up RMAA it can be difficult (and a learning experience) to get it right.
Ian
popej - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link
Nice to see you are planning steps in right direction. Using reference card for measurements is a proper solution. Be aware, that separate card add complications to the test, for example you will have to take care about ground loops and signal level matching. Professional card with balanced input could help a lot.